Bar Simpson – Scarborough Cllr Brian Simpson In Spat With Constituency Residents

Whitby --> Featured --> Bar Simpson – Scarborough Cllr Brian Simpson In Spat With Constituency Residents

Bar Simpson – Scarborough Cllr Brian Simpson In Spat With Constituency Residents

Bar Simpson – In My View By Nigel Ward, Scarborough Cllr Brian Simpson In Spat With Constituency Residents

Readers may have stumbled upon an article on the Scarborough Evening News web-site (Tuesday 17th April 2012), entitled “Residents hit with local tax hike of 111%” (click to view).

The main thrust of the article is that this year’s SBC Council Tax bill has seen Eastfield Parish Council increase its precept from £32,120 to £68,168 in one move. This 111 per cent increase compares to an average Parish Council tax increase of only 5.5 per cent.

The Scarborough Evening News reports, “As a result of the rise residents will this month have to start paying an extra £2 each month for a Band D property.”

Towards the end of the article, Cllr Brian Simpson is quoted as claiming: “Once I have explained how the money is being spent to people they have been quite happy with it.”

This opinion is not reflected in the ‘Comments’ section of the article, where the first nine entries dedicate themselves to challenging Cllr Brian Simpson in the most strenuous terms.

But my interest was fully aroused when I noticed that Cllr Brian Simpson, in ‘Comment #10’, had joined the debate to defend his position.

This is all as it should be. In fact, thus far I could only applaud Cllr Brian Simpson for engaging with the electorate, in the public domain, in an attempt to explain his Council’s decision.

Unfortunately, in ‘Comment #12’, I soon discovered that Cllr Brian Simpson had strayed into the shadowy area of ‘misinformation’.

His statement “I do NOT get anything from NYCC for internet” is totally disingenuous.

  • The County Council’s Members Allowances Scheme pays a single Basic Allowance for the rôle of Member of the County Council. There is an expectation linked to that allowance that Members make available a broadband connection.

In plain language, the basic Allowance includes money for Broadband.

‘Comment #14’ challenges Cllr Brian Simpson on this point, and another point, and Councillor Simpson’s response, in ‘Comment #15’, skips over the Broadband allowance altogether – and starts to exhibit some aggressive/defensive irritation.

By ‘Comment #17’, Cllr Simpson is clearly losing his temper:

“For the last time I only get the basic allowence[sic] for NYCC!! Come and have a look at my pay slips if you do not believe me and you will see that there are no extra payments!!”

Well, we have looked at your ‘pay slips’, Brian, and it seems that you have not availed yourself of the opportunity to “renunciate all or a part” of your NYCC Basic Allowance (as the Rules allow) – therefore you have accepted money from NYCC for your Broadband connection. In my view, have told the Scarborough Evening News readership a huge whopper!

And you have omitted to mention that you have also accepted £255 per annum Broadband Allowance from SBC. That is called ‘double-dipping’, and I believe that claiming the same expenses twice is commonly known as ‘fraud’ – correct me if I am wrong.

But, as Bob Dylan avers, “The best is always yet to come”.

By ‘Comment #25’, Councillor Simpson seems to have lost all sense of propriety. Addressing another contributor, posting as ‘krissy60’, he proceeds to disclose that contributor’s real-life name and identity, thus breaching the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, which require that the individual who the sensitive personal data is actually about must give explicit consent to a member of an authority to the process of revealing his/her personal data. I would doubt that ‘krissy60’ gave his/her consent to Councillor Simpson – correct me if I am wrong.

By ‘Comment #25’, Councillor Simpson is in full rant, casting pejorative aspersions of the cheapest kind on his co-contributor: “Kristina I am not concerned that you do not believe me and I should have guessed that you are a Miss”. What were you implying, Councillor Simpson? Is this an example of the RESPECT that ALL elected members MUST evince to EVERYBODY, under the terms of the SBC Councillors’ Code of Conduct? As ‘Comment #47’ (SirChasm) puts it, “It was the defamation of character, suggesting that krissy was so awful that no-one would marry her. That was nasty and uncalled for.”

My impression is that this is the conduct of a sexist, bullying ‘double-dipper’, playing fast and loose with various clearly-defined regulations with which he MUST (and has a duty to) be familiar. In any case, ignorance offers no defence under the law.

Councillor Brian Simpson (LibDem) is an elected representative of the public of some considerable experience. He has been playing the local politics game at all three levels for some years now.

Currently, he occupies the following positions:

Eastfield Parish Council

  • Councillor – and Chairman of the Parish Council

Scarborough Borough Council

  • Councillor – Eastfield Ward
  • Cabinet Member – Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhood Renewal, Community Involvement and Partnerships, Democratic Services, Customer Services and Safer Communities
  • Member – Appointments Committee
  • Member – Council Committee
  • Member – Standards Committee
  • Appointee – Employee Joint Consultative Committee
  • Appointee – Groundwork North Yorkshire

North Yorkshire County Council

  • Councillor – Eastfield & Osgodby Ward
  • Member – Yorkshire Coast & Moors County Area Committee
  • Member – Corporate and Partnerships Overview & Scrutiny Committee

Would you be prepared to agree on the fact that Brian has been around long enough to know the ropes of the local government game by now? Me Too!

It is a game that has been played long enough in these parts without due regard for the regulations – and Councillor Simpson, remember, is himself a member of the SBC Standards Committee.

What an example! Standards? What standards?

Hypocrisies such as this never fail to tickle me . . .


“Don’t we have fun every minute

Oh, what a gay life we lead

One chocolate milkshake with two straws stuck in it

What else does anyone need?

[Randy Newman – ‘Live’ – 1970]

Related reading:

About the Author:

Website Admin for the Real Whitby Website. All authors of the Real Whitby Website have access to publish on the website. Individual authors will usually sign off their articles with their own names.


  1. Bob Turner April 19, 2012 at 2:55 pm - Reply

    As a point of interest – Do any of Mr Simpson’s other roles have an allowance or expenses attached, or are these services given free gratis for the greater good of fellow citizens? This is, naturally, not a personal snipe at Mr Simpson, merely a general question re Committee Membership and and if there are any financial implications for the taxpayer.
    I’m particularly pleased to note his interest in Community Involvement and Safer Communities, both of which are subjects VERY close to my own heart. It is both of these that are, of course, at the very core of what BS (Big Society) is all about, apparently.

    • DKP April 19, 2012 at 5:37 pm - Reply

      Simpering Simpson draws a total of £17.4K for his efforts. A respectable income, worthy of respectable behaviour. He is a professional politician. And a disgrace to that profession. He should be stood down.

      • Nigel Ward April 19, 2012 at 6:05 pm - Reply

        That looks about right to me:

        It seems to me that, given the inefficacy of the Complaints procedure (and the fact the Brian Simpson is actually on the Standards Committee) that the best solution here – and one that has no impact at all on the public purse – would be as follows:

        1) Brian should repay his ‘double-dipped’ allowance/expenses for his Broadband over the last six years.

        2) He should take a quarter page ad in the SEN and offer his apologies to the lady he insulted.

        3) He should take another quarter page ad in the SEN and offer his apologies to the electorate.

        Your move, Brian.

        Or should we keep digging?

        • Nigel Ward April 19, 2012 at 7:03 pm - Reply

          Just remembered my Sept 2010 TRANSPARENCY QUESTIONNAIRE again, in which only ELEVEN of FIFTY Councillors answered inm the affirmative about upholding the Prime Minister’s pledge for TRANSPARENCY. Guess who logged in, third on the list?

          —– Original Message —–

          From: Cllr.Brian Simpson

          Sent: 25/09/10 12:49 PM

          To: ‘Nigel’

          Subject: Re: TRANSPARENCY and the public interest

          Hi Nigel, I DO uphold the PM’s statement calling for transparency. Regards Brian

          • Stakesby Legs April 19, 2012 at 10:19 pm - Reply

            You’re too bloody generous, Nigel. The man should resign. End of.

      • Sarraceniac April 21, 2012 at 10:21 am - Reply

        DKP. Does the figure you quote include his Disability Living Allowance? I am sure we all sympathise with his disability but if he were to take a job then immediately the relevant Govt. dept. would claim that he can’t be disabled? Surely with his fingers in so many pies then local politics is his job and the money he receives as a benefit should be stopped. Or maybe he isn’t doing much as a parish/town/county councilor or as ‘leader’ of a 3 strong Lie-dem borough council group?

    • Carole Gerada April 19, 2012 at 11:39 pm - Reply

      All committee chairmen at Borough and County levels receive extra allowances for their roles as chairmen.

      Unfortunately, Cllr Brian Simpson does not recognise Neighbourhood Watch, which is the grassroots of Big Society caring for communities in his role of Safer Communities Portfolio Holder. The fact he excludes me, a fellow councillor and active Community Advocate with Neighbourhood Watch, from any Safer Community meeings is evidence he is biased, prejudices and exclusive in his treatment of fellow Eastfield residents.

  2. cerena binks April 19, 2012 at 7:56 pm - Reply

    i seriously wish that Brian Simpson and his fellow ” councellors” would actually listen to what the Eastfield community people are asking for instead of them all going about their selfish ways and thinking about their monthly wages!!1 eastfield NEEDS something for people, young and old to all join in together and actually be a community instead of it being split….Eastfield is a place where im raising my 5 children and theres really nothing to do for ANY kids on this estate…the parks are littered and dangerous and theres teens and young adults sat drinking or smoking weed, sorry thats not a safe place for any child to play!!!! about time councellors realised what EASTFIELD NEEDS and not what the dumb-ass councellors think we need!!!!!

    • admin April 19, 2012 at 9:49 pm - Reply

      The councilors really need to listen to the people. But to do that they need to be out and about in the community to meet and converse with the public. Far too many councilors get elected and then dissapear off the face of the planet. Im wondering if your councilor is visible in your community Cerena ? How easy is it for you to contact him and will he listen if you do ?

      • Carole Gerada April 19, 2012 at 11:58 pm - Reply

        All comments by residents so far are valid. Whenever I walk around Eastfield, I am often met with “We only see you councillors when it is election time, and then not again for another 4 years.”

        I strive very hard to try and visit residents on the Eastway Ward which I am a Parish Councillor for, and sadly have to admit that I have not visited everyone either. However, I do make efforts to do so, and because I campaigned to be a Borough councillor, too, a lot of residents on the Westway ward know me too. So I try and give as much time to anyone who needs to speak to me and indeed have contact with some residents more than others.

        Please accept my apologies. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to meet with me about any issues. Also, the last Friday of every month before the monthly Parish Council meeting, which is held on the last Monday night of the month at 7pm at the Community Centre; there is a Councillors surgery at Eastfield Library from 4pm – 5pm for any resident to drop in and speak to one of the councillors. Please feel free to do so. However if you are unable to attend the councillor surgery at that time, please feel free to contact me on 07790 912077 and I will try to help you.

        By the way, Parish Councillors do not get paid. It is purely a voluntary role. Borough and County councillors receive an annual allowance paid monthly, which provides them with the funds needed to progress residents issues.

    • Carole Gerada April 19, 2012 at 11:49 pm - Reply

      You are absolutely right. I am sometimes ashamed that I am an Eastfield Parish Councillor. However, residents had faith in me and elected me. I am still striving (a lone voice against 10 Parish Councillors) to ensure Eastfield residents views are heard. Unfortunately, when I raise issues of concern which residents have told me about at council meetings, the Chairman says that no one has complained to him, therefore, all residents are happy! I thought that Eastfield council was made up democratically of 11 councillors, however, the Chairman overrides residents in meetings, and is biased against any suggestions I make or attempts I make to help residents who live near the Beach Walk play park. Cllr Simpson is very defensive and says there is no money to put safety railing around the park; or to provide CCTV to prevent anti-social behaviour. However, it was Cllr Simpson’s suggestion to increase the Parish Precept by 111%. Only 2 Councillors, one of whom was me – objected strongly to an increase of any kind. Please spread the word to all your friends to attend the Annual Parish Council Assembly on Thursday 3rd May at 6.30pm at Eastfield Community Centre where all members of the public are invited and are free to ask any questions of the council in an open forum.

      If you would like my assistance in anything, please feel free to contact me on 07790 912077. Kind regards.

  3. Millicent April 19, 2012 at 9:17 pm - Reply

    I must say that I do feel that a three hatted councillor may have a conflict of interests. Afterall when the three Authorities are bidding from the same funding pool how do they quite manage that? ” Should I give my Parish a larger precept?” .. “Why, let me ask myself as a Borough Councillor, how big a precept would I need?”, and, “As a County Councillor how do I feel on precepts, now where is that Parish?”…. “Of course I approve!” …”That was me wasn’t it?”… “Is It?” … “I think I should know if it was me, but which me was it?”

    Resident: “yeah, but no, but yeah but no, well my mate that works down at Town Hall trying to claim ‘is benefits actually said if I ‘ad two more kids on me own and called mesen Miss ‘sted of Missus, then benefits wouldn’t want to check if I ‘ad a bloke cos I could still have a bloke but none would know like, but yeah but no cos ay is single right and therefore am not eligible to vote for, cos I am a Miss, so like what that wanker does wiv is precept and who he waves it at is ‘is buisness but yeah but nothing, no but he aint waving his precept at me eh Shirl”

  4. cerena binks April 20, 2012 at 5:59 am - Reply

    Unless i pop to the shop or do a school run, then i might see Brian or possibly another councellor ( rather not name) but i NEVER see any of them long enough to actually discuss any issues about the Eastate…elected and gone!!! not a care about anything other than themselves…i know they hold meeting that the public can go to, but with 5 kids and the meeting hitting on routine time, its hard for me to go,,,,believe me, id love to go to one and see for myself what goes on with these so called councellors…..least if i was a councellor, the estate community would see me every day and not get elected then dissappear!!!

  5. Kristina Pinder April 20, 2012 at 9:02 am - Reply

    In the past 6 years I have seen Brian Simpson twice, (doing his shopping) He is not an approachable man, and I must say that if I ever wanted something done, or wanted to know anything I definitely would not ask him, I used to ask the late Alex Abiola,he was a strange and at time a difficult man, who I worked alongside at the ‘Eastfield Community Help Organisation’ (now defunct) but the one overriding thing that he had was a genuine passion for this Estate, which most of the present P Cllrs seem to lack. Whenever I have made any points online Mr Simpson has either been derisive, or insulting, something one does not expect from an elected person.

  6. Bob Turner April 20, 2012 at 3:37 pm - Reply

    There’s lots of interesting information filtering through on a variety of issues.
    Thank you one and all for clarification on the allowances – £17.4K sounds like a nice little wedge if you can get it.
    Having followed one of Nigel’s links I note that travelling and subsistence expenses can also be claimed. Interestingly, I was recently informed by the owner of a residential care home for adults with learning difficulties that a County Council allows £25 per WEEK to feed a resident whilst Councillors can claim up to £10 for a SINGLE lunch. This may go some way to explain why there are so many obviously well fed fat cats at Council meetings.
    Carole – “Cllr Brian Simpson does not recognise Neighbourhood Watch, which is the grassroots of Big Society caring for communities in his role of Safer Communities Portfolio Holder”.
    As Neighbourhood Watch Office Manager in my own City (since resigned in disgust) I am not the slightest bit surprised at Mr Simpson’s attitude and have experienced similarly unhelpful attitudes from my own City Councillors AND the Police. Promises of support that NEVER materialised but somehow they were always available for PR BS (NOT Big Society!) photo shoots and press releases. I believe that the populace misunderstood (were misled?) the original BS (Big Society) concept. Most of my personal BS (you decide!) experiences are of Councils effectively ‘offloading’ as many/much of their responsibilities to the citizens as they can. Frequently this is achieved by informing the long suffering taxpayer that a ‘service’ is being reduced or withdrawn and informing them that, “If you want it to continue then you’ll have to run it/do it yourself, and we will/might bung you a few quid and/or a bit of advice to get you started”. Often any financial support is only very short term so the long term consequences are likely to be dire and the Council have effectively distanced themself from any future failure. No doubt there have been some successes and will be more but I’m not encouraged by what I have experienced so far in my own communities.
    There’s nothing like an election to get the Councillors crawling out of the woodwork!

  7. Finn MCcool April 21, 2012 at 2:00 am - Reply

    I’m sure he is a nice guy ,he’s just got mixed up with a bad crowd…..

    • Stakesby Legs April 21, 2012 at 6:27 pm - Reply

      Hahaha. Dozens of likes, dozens of thumbs-ups, and just that one lonely thumbs-down for the “in with a bad crowd” line. Come on, own up. Which of the other LibDem councillors was it, then? or was it the man himself? Your not going home till someone owns up!!!

      • Bob Turner April 22, 2012 at 12:41 pm - Reply

        I’m conspiring to believe that someone took Finn’s comment literally.

  8. petra April 21, 2012 at 6:02 am - Reply

    Like many I follow the Scarborough evening news and have seen comments from the man in question in the past. Some supported him at first but were soon enlightened to his agenda when he tried to explain his reasons for voting a certain way on issues which were against the wishes of the majority of people who voted him in. Finn MCcool I taught my childen that if they were with others who were upto no good and they stood and watched they were as guilty. Mr Simpson is an adult and as an adult never mind a councillor he has a duty to lead by example. His behaviour on the said story alone proves the man is not equiped to hold the posts he does and be paid by us. He should be removed, get a job in the real world and stop inflicting his, I know best attitude on the People of Eastfield. If he is arrogant enough to ‘earn’ a higher than average living off the backs of us then he is physically fit enough to earn a real wage.

    • Tim Thorne April 23, 2012 at 2:47 pm - Reply

      Cllr. Simpson was having lumps bitten out of him by HSM on the SEN comments page. It is understandable he bit back, but should apologise for his rude behaviour to Kristina. There’s an American saying: “It goes with the territory”. If you can’t handle having lumps bitten out of you by we voters then you’re in the wrong job.

  9. Jane Swales April 21, 2012 at 8:07 am - Reply

    I have been been waiting to see how the Evening News would cover this disgraceful episode. Answer? Not one word. Ever since that senationalist reporting of the Councillor with porn on his SBC laptop, there seems to have been a blanket of silence thrown over bad behaviour by Councillors. I could certainly tell a tale or two. But should I? Would that be too subversive? My sister thinks I should. Me too! I think I’ll drop Nigel a line.

  10. F L C April 21, 2012 at 10:21 am - Reply

    @ Jane….

    You do realise that by saying such a thing you will be labeled a “conspiracy theorist” by those that don’t like to think that the media could be complicit in covering up or lying about such things.

    I would say he needs a proverbial slap upside the head, but its likely I’ll be told that am being overly violent and agressive by these same people.

    It really does seem to me that there is a cadre of gringos bent on secretive and subversive actions that benefit no one but themselves.

    Perhaps it’s just a consipracy theory…

  11. Mathew Smith April 21, 2012 at 9:37 pm - Reply

    Has anybody actually ascertained if the user account on the Scarborough Evening News is actually Councillor Simpson? Has Cllr Simpson confirmed or denied if he is the author of these comments?

    If not then this piece of ‘journalism’ is little more unfounded accusations without firm proof.

    • Jane Swales April 22, 2012 at 8:25 am - Reply

      You are overlooking the rock solid case of double-dipping, Mathew. Claiming twice for the same outlay is fraud. Indefensible.

      The Councillor has offered no denial and no apology. The newspaper would have withdrawn his remarks immediately if he had claimed impersonation. As for the rest of his expenses, perhaps the Research Funding Office should be informed?

      Resignation from all three Councils looks unavoidable now.

      • Mathew Smith April 22, 2012 at 8:35 pm - Reply

        Apologies if my comments have not dealt with the matter of Councillor Simpson’s expenses – I was talking about the comments on the SEN site.

        With regards to the so called ‘double dipping’ I am afraid that I do not know a great deal about the expenses system. However it was my understanding that NYCC pays all members a single allowance rather than paying a specific amount of money for broadband?

        • Nigel Ward April 22, 2012 at 10:23 pm - Reply

          Perhaps you should read through all the FOIs, Mathew. Available here:

          (the bit about the Irish Bank Holiday is particularly drole)

          The Basic Allowance “is one composite allowance with the general expectation that this covers certain out of pocket costs including the matters covered in the correspondence, and specifically broadband.”

          “including……specifically broadband”.

          And then claiming from SBC as well? Too greedy. Case closed.

  12. Nigel Ward April 21, 2012 at 11:15 pm - Reply

    @ Mathew Smith:

    Regular readers of the SEN web-site will, I am sure, confirm that the user name ‘B Simpson’ has been in evidence for quite a while, invariably posting on Eastfield and Parish/Borough/County Council issues with apparent detailed inside knowledge. I know from my own exchanges with Brian that he engages with the public through social networking and comments boxes. I have corresponded sporadically with Brian for around three years now, by email and through FaceBook personal messages; I can confirm that the writing style and spelling/punctuation/grammar idiosyncracies in the comments on the SEN story conform to my own experience of Brian’s style. The SEN privacy conditions will surely preclude the possibility of confirming that at source. Unless he comes forward with a denial and/or a claim to have been impersonated as the author of the reported comments, it will remain difficult to give him the benefit of the doubt – if any. On that basis, I am satisfied that he is the author. If you are not, then perhaps you could make a positive contribution to the debate by making your own enquiries and publishing your results.

    @ Sarraceniac:

    Earlier today, I posted on FaceBook:

    “It is important to remember that, though we are all human beings, elected members and paid public servants embody a separate identity as members of a ‘body corporate’. I try to restrict my criticism to the way in which they conduct their official positions – and leave their private human identities outside of the public debate. I know Brian a little, and I know he has suffered greatly. It is his conduct as a ‘two-hatted’ Councillor that I believe is worthy of scrutiny and criticism. It is on that basis that he must be held accountable to the electorate.”

    My articles are published under the rubric “In My View”. I offer my opinion; that is all.

  13. petra April 22, 2012 at 5:45 am - Reply

    Again as someone who follows the SEN website I have read and re read the comments on the story and looked at Cllr Simpsons web page and the facebook site where he is one of the administrators and the clues are there. The style used, the words used and Cllr Simpson responded to one of the comments that used a word pulled from Cllr Simpsons own web page. Comments on the facebook page talking about his behaviour were deleted, only the administrators have the ability to do that, at times people have tried to hijack a persons user name but you can’t use the same one so they stand out as fake. No doubt at all That it was Cllr Simpson. The only thing absent from the whole debate was comments from the lad who at one time would jump in and try to defend the arrogance spilling from Cllr Simpsons postings.

  14. Sarraceniac April 22, 2012 at 10:06 am - Reply

    @Nigel Ward. No real ‘argument’ with you. I too am just expressing an opinion and in my view you cannot divorce the role of a civic leader from his general behaviour so there we seem to disagree. I am not even sure that Mr. Simpson is in receipt of DLA but I do believe that ‘Caesar must not only be above reproach but must be seen to be above reproach’.

  15. Nigel Ward April 22, 2012 at 10:53 am - Reply


    And I have no argument with you. What is more, I fully support your final remark – “Caesar must not only be above reproach but must be seen to be above reproach”.

    My point was twofold. The right to privacy is fundamental. Who will step up to the plate to give voluntary service to the community if their lives, their health and their sexuality are perpetually at risk from unrestrained sensationalism?

    And secondly, I believe that an elected representative should be accountable to his electorate in respect of his/her administrative duties, performance and integrity – and not in respect of his/her personal preferences or beliefs. Hence my support for Councillor Simon Parkes – who has been mercilessly mocked for his belief in extraterrestrials. ( ).

    Just saying . . 😉

  16. Mathew Smith April 22, 2012 at 11:53 am - Reply

    @ Nigel Ward and others,

    Whilst it may be the case that the Cllr Simpson user account’s writing is stylistically very similar to Cllr Simpson, is there still not a possibility that this account might not be who he says he is. After all there is also an Elton John account who may or may not write very similarly to the real Elton.

    Mr Ward I appreciate your considered response however I would feel that the burden of proof should fall on the person making the accusations.

  17. Nigel Ward April 22, 2012 at 12:37 pm - Reply


    The insulting remarks, you will recall, arose in the context of a debate about Cllr Simpson’s abuse of the expenses/allowances system. It is a matter of public record that he accepted the full Basic Allowance from NYCC, includig the Broadband increment – and declining the opportunity to ‘Renunciate’ (why not ‘renounce’ you will have to ask NYCC Legal)any part of it. It is also a matter of public record that he also accepted the £255 Broadband Allowance from SBC. The burden of proof thus far is already clearly established. In your desire to exculpate Cllr Simpson, you have twice passed over this point.

    On the matter of the authorship of the false statements and the insulting remarks, the burden of proof can only reside with those who are empowered to investigate. The SEN will not breach their privacy policy for you or for me.

    I have just posted to Kristina Pinder, on FaceBook:

    “I cannot understand why he does not

    (a) repay his Broadband money and publish a denial that it was him posting as ‘B Simpson’,


    (c) repay his Broadband money, apologise to the public, and apologise to you.

    [I left (b) out for a reason].

    I have nothing to add to that. Have a nice day.

  18. Sarraceniac April 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm - Reply

    If someone is impersonating Brian Simpson, as Mr Smith claims, shouldn’t Mr. Smith report that person who has stolen Mr Simpson’s identity to the appropriate authority with his proof, as per his own view that the person making the claim should prove it. Identity theft can be considered a serious offence.

  19. Nigel Ward April 22, 2012 at 3:57 pm - Reply

    On a lighter note, I am relieved to hear that the man in Eastfield who suffered a gunshot wound to the leg is not seriously hurt. I thought for a moment that Cllr Simpson had shot himself in the foot . . .

  20. Sarraceniac April 22, 2012 at 4:11 pm - Reply

    Lol. I rather think that, metaphorically at least, Councilor Simpson has shot himself in the foot. Pleased the genuinely shot guy is not seriously hurt though.

    Back to the thread though, I was amused, but not surprised, that one person does not like my comments about covering up the crime of identity theft. Wonder who that could be? Lol. Despite the current apparent crisis in the Lie-dems I still have a friend who is quite senior in their party. He is of the opinion that Mr Smith is also quite senior in that group. In fact he is so sick of it he is thinking of leaving and joining UKIP. Frying pans and fire spring immediately to mind.

  21. Mathew Smith April 22, 2012 at 8:07 pm - Reply


    I am not claiming that someone is impersonating Brian Simpson. I am merely pointing out the possibility that this could happen.

    • Tim Thorne April 23, 2012 at 2:40 pm - Reply

      Just out of interest, what do you think about Cllr. Simpson’s troubles with his expenses?

  22. Sarraceniac April 23, 2012 at 6:50 am - Reply

    Yes. It could. I am opening a porcine flying school as well. Perhaps this hypothetical impersonator would like a free membership?

  23. Richard Ineson April 25, 2012 at 4:48 pm - Reply

    Cllr. Simpson has undoubtedly acted in a manner unbecoming to a person holding public office. The way in which he has addressed Krissy60 and betrayed her identity in direct contravention of the Data Protection Act, which is a very serious matter indeed, not to mention the very arrogant and derogatory remarks, “Kristina I am not concerned that you do not believe me and I should have guessed that you are a Miss.” must warrant some disciplinary action from both the Standards Committee of SBC and NYCC and also the LibDem Party Executive. I admire Krissy60 for being able to brush aside these offensive remarks which must inevitably have caused her distress, but I feel that the relevant authorities must take some action against this Councillor who is bringing the integrity of local government into disrepute both by his outrageous, unprofessional and intemperate behaviour and also his apparent exploitation of the Councillors’ allowance for Broadband access, commonly known as ”double dipping”.

  24. kristina pinder April 25, 2012 at 6:08 pm - Reply

    Mr Simpson is at it again, his voice has returned, he has now referred to the sight which I set up on FB just under 2 weeks ago as “An Offbeat site about Eastfield”. this site has over 400 members already, and no affiliation to any political party, it is for people from the Estate to say what they want about the things that concern them. whether it is good or bad. So he read what someone had put on this site, but chose to answer it on the other Eastfield site, which I have left because, it is run by friends of his, and I was getting a wee bit sick of things disappearing that myself and others had posted. Am really cross now.

  25. Carole Gerada April 26, 2012 at 11:23 am - Reply

    I need to see if I have been blocked by that site, too. I stopped reading it when scathing, libellous information was posted on it about me by fellow Parish Councillors. I notice that one of Brian’s friends, followers and fellow Parish Councillors has added a comment to this site informing people about when the Parish Council meeting is – by the way, Friday (tomorrow) there is a councillor surgery at the library from 4pm to 5pm – everyone welcome to raise concerns with councillors present. Next Parish Council meeting is Monday 30 April at 7pm at the meeting room at Eastfield Community Centre. Annual Parish meeting, where Cllr Brian Simpson Chairs and all councillors attend as residents, not councillors is on Thursday 3 June at 6.30pm in Eastfield Community Centre. All welcome and an open forum for public to ask questions of the Parish Council via Cllr Simpson. Parish Council Annual meeting (confusing, I know) is on 28 May at 6.30pm at the Community Centre meeting room This is where councillors vote for who sits on all committees. Cllr Simpson has already said to me that he will use his casting vote against me (he gets TWO votes!!) to ensure I don’t get onto any committees of substance. This he did last year, too. Please all come to this meeting, or attend the meeting on 30 April and see how he dictates the meeting. He is not democratic.

  26. Nigel Ward August 24, 2012 at 4:56 pm - Reply

    Deeper and deeper . . .

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Nigel
    To: Moira Beighton
    Cc: Gill Wilkinson ; Carole Dunn ; Weighell, Cllr.John ; Richard FLINTON ; LISA DIXON ; FOI
    Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 5:36 PM
    Subject: *** Yet another Addendum *** – Complaint to NYCC Standards Committee – NYCC/SC/15-24 [6]

    Ms Moira BEIGHTON – Senior Lawyer (Governance) – NYCC
    Cc: Gill WILKINSON – Democratic & Administrative Services Manager – SBC



    With reference to my ‘double-dipping’ complaints:

    My attention has been drawn to a text entitled ‘Personal Statement’ on the following web-site:

    For your convenience, I reproduce that text, here:
    A recent news story regarding internet allowances for Council members has caused both confusion and given a false impression of how things stand.

    I strongly refute any suggestion that I have acted either improperly or fraudulently in my role as both a member of the County Council or the Borough Council.

    I would like to make it clear that I have never physically claimed any internet expenses from either Scarborough Borough Council or North Yorkshire County Council.

    Both Councils paid an internet allowance automatically to their members be it part of basic allowance or a separate allowance.

    I have NOT received any allowance that I am not entitled to. I have spoken to both the County Council and Borough respective legal services and I am confident of a positive outcome to recent concerns raised by a member of the public.

    Cllr Brian Simpson

    Please ensure for me that the Standards Committee is made fully cogniscent of this ‘Personal Statement’ and its significance, which, in case it escapes you, I outline, as follows.

    1) Cllr Simpson’s form of words betrays considerable disingenuousness. “I have never physically claimed”, for example seeks to convey the impression that, if it could be shown that Cllr Simpson was “unaware” (as Councillor Kenyon was “unaware” of her Company Secretaryship in Dales Timber Limited), the he would stand blameless. This is far from being the case. Firstly, ignorance of the law forms no defence. Secondly, ALL NYCC elected members, Cllr Simpson included, were provided with the Guidance that clearly informs them that the Broadband increment had been subsumed within the Basic Allowance and they were free to ‘renunciate’ all or any part of the basic Allowance.

    2) It follows, therefore, with no room for debate, that Cllr Simpson, whether aware or not and whether he “physically claimed” or not, is accountable for his acceptance of the Broadband increment. His acceptance of the SBC Broadband Allowance is, I trust, not in dispute.

    3) It is categorically untrue that Cllr Simpson did NOT receive any allowance to which he was not entitled – unless one subscribes to the bizarre construct that if you, or any other elected member or paid public servant, received (whether in ignorance or not) two payments for one and the same expense, you would be within your rights, moral and legal, to retain that money – in disregard of your option to ‘renunciate’ it. That would be entirely dishonest. It is a shameless breach of the public trust.

    Please let us have no more of this petty sophistry. Cllr Simpson took the money twice and is clearly utterly unrepentant at having swindled the public purse.

    Make no mistake, I intend to work closely with the Council to rid it of these parasites. I imagine that you will not wish to take issue with that policy?

    I continue to await word from your Investigating Officer(s). Please attend to that oversight. Thank you.

    Yours, with very kind regards,


  27. miniclip biliard October 20, 2012 at 4:55 pm - Reply

    I think the admin of this site is truly working hard for his site, as here every information is quality
    based information.

  28. Brian Dodds March 17, 2013 at 10:32 pm - Reply

    I have stated before but I will say it again, there needs to be a system introduced where a committee of chosen members of the electorate will have the power to collect evidence of misconduct. Discuss the matter, and if the named councillor(s) are proved to be guilty of misconduct they should be removed from their position. These matters should not be dealt with by paid officials within the council because it has been made blatantly obvious that they are as guilty as the councillors they are supposed to regulate.

  29. Carole Gerada March 17, 2013 at 11:25 pm - Reply

    Hear, hear. Glad you raised this point lest it becomes buried in the run up to May 2013 elections and peoples memories forget.

  30. kristina pinder March 18, 2013 at 10:49 am - Reply

    I have asked you not to contact me Ms Gerada, and am a little bit annoyed that you have done it through admin. Your constant barrage of accusations against various Cllrs has now become boring, and two faced to say the least, as you yourself are guilty of various indescretions as a Cllr.
    This is last years news, and has been “done to death” I have my views about the broadband fiasco, and the hike in council tax, but have given them on more than one occasion.

  31. admin March 18, 2013 at 12:47 pm - Reply

    Kristina I can guarantee you that the admin of this site has not passed any of your personal details on and and we certainly have not aided anyone to contact you. I dont even know Carol Gerada, shes simply a user of the site.

  32. kristina pinder March 18, 2013 at 12:54 pm - Reply

    Ok thankyou very much admin, but when I saw Ms Geradas name, I thought that she had found another way to get to me. I apologise for misunderstanding.

Leave A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.